On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:06:24PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/23/2011 2:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >>Why? Turing emulability of the physics that supervened on is surely 
> >>irrelevant.
> >
> >Unless it plays a role at some level, like you suggest by
> >attributing a physical activity to something which is not used in
> >a branch, but might be used in another branch, for physical
> >reason. In that case, *such* physical acitvity is relevant, and
> >has to be taken into account in the artificial brain, as it will
> >be in the UD.
> 
> Although we know that brain processes are approximately classical,
> they are not strictly classical.  So is it Russell's hypothesis that
> a strictly classical brain, as in Greg Egan's "The Singleton", would
> obey the 323 principle, but that real brains don't?
> 
> Brent

Nice characterisation. Although I would nuance this by saying that the
multiversal 323 principle is far from obvious, and requires proof
before being used in an argument.

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to